Bradley v. State
| Decision Date | 26 January 1968 |
| Citation | 36 Wis.2d 345,155 N.W.2d 564 |
| Parties | Sherry Jenlette BRADLEY, Plaintiff in Error, v. STATE of Wisconsin, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Richard A. McDermott, Milwaukee, for plaintiff in error.
Bronson C. La Follette, Atty. Gen., Hugh R. O'Connell, Dist. Atty., Milwaukee County, E. Michael McCann, Asst. Dist. Att., for defendant in error.
ON REHEARING
The plaintiff in error in her brief for rehearing argues that this court erred: (1) In concluding the confessions were freely and voluntarily made, and (2) in applying on appeal the great-weight-and-clear-preponderance-of-the-evidence test rather than the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt test. This court rested its decision of voluntariness on two grounds. First, the court made an independent investigation of the facts underlying the issue of voluntariness and concluded the confessions were voluntarily made beyond a reasonable doubt. In this procedure, this court itself was required to be and was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of the voluntariness of the confessions.
It is true, we stated also in the opinion the trial court's finding was not against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence. But, in view of our independent determination this statement, although true, is immaterial. Whether the proper test on review of a trial court's finding of voluntariness when this court not not make an independent investigation of the facts should be stated in terms of the great-weight-and-clear-preponderance-of-the-evidence test or in terms of whether this court can say that the trial court could have been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt or that no finder of fact could be so convinced, we reserve for future consideration. Rehearing denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Wilks
...discretion to review a constitutional issue in a criminal case is found in Bradley v. State, 36 Wis.2d 345, 350, 153 N.W.2d 38 (1967) 155 N.W.2d 564 (1968): "this court may nevertheless decide a constitutional question not raised below if it appears in the interests of justice to do so and ......
-
State v. Billings
...(1967); State v. Hoyt, 21 Wis.2d 284, 128 N.W.2d 645 (1964). Cf. Bradley v. State, 36 Wis.2d 345, 153 N.W.2d 38, reh'g denied 36 Wis.2d 345, 155 N.W.2d 564 (1967).4 Since the intoxication issue was not raised in the appellant's post-conviction motion, the trial court's decision on the motio......
-
Theriault v. State
...is applicable to adult confessions, State v. Wallace (1973), 59 Wis.2d 66, 81, 207 N.W.2d 855.6 (1967), 36 Wis.2d 345, 153 N.W.2d 38, 155 N.W.2d 564.7 Id. at page 358, 153 N.W.2d at page 44.8 Id. at page 359a, 153 N.W.2d at page 44--45.9 (1972), 54 Wis.2d 699, 196 N.W.2d 748.10 Id. at page ......
-
Hortonville Ed. Ass'n v. Hortonville Joint School Dist. No. 1
...issues. State v. Morales (1971), 51 Wis.2d 650, 654, 187 N.W.2d 841; Bradley v. State (1967), 36 Wis.2d 345, 359, 359a, 153 N.W.2d 38, 155 N.W.2d 564. We believe, in this case, it is in the interest of justice to consider the issues raised as set forth Does Wisconsin law allow the disharge ......